2004 (3) TMI 475 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) regarding confiscation of goods under SSI exemption notification.
2. Requirement of maintaining statutory record for manufacturers under small-scale exemption notification.
3. Confiscation of goods found in excess of statutory record.
4. Interpretation of Board's circular dated 9-6-98 regarding SSI exemption notification.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the confiscation of goods under the Small Scale Industries (SSI) exemption notification. The Revenue officers found that the respondents, working under the SSI exemption notification, were not maintaining any record regarding the production of goods. The adjudicating authority confiscated the goods and imposed a redemption fine along with a penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the confiscation, stating that manufacturers under the small-scale exemption notification are not required to maintain statutory records, and imposed a reduced penalty. The Revenue contended that goods found in excess of statutory records are liable for confiscation.

The respondents argued that as per the Board's circular dated 9-6-98, they were not required to file any declaration for availing the SSI exemption notification benefits. They maintained simplified records and cleared goods using invoices. The Tribunal noted that the respondents were indeed working under the SSI exemption notification and were required to maintain simplified records. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the respondents did not exceed the exemption limit during the financial year. Since the respondents were not obligated to maintain statutory records, the Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the confiscation.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the respondents, operating under the SSI exemption notification, were not required to maintain statutory records. The decision was based on the specific finding that the respondents did not surpass the exemption limit and were compliant with the simplified record-keeping requirements. The judgment highlights the importance of adherence to the regulatory framework applicable to manufacturers under specific exemptions to avoid confiscation of goods based on record-keeping discrepancies.